Originally posted by cal31 It was fricken corny, how could the witch king, the most terrifying person other than Sauron himself, miss a weak woman with the weapons he had? It just wouldn't happen, plus on top of that you have that gay ass line and that totally ruined it. I've gone on LOTR forums and even die hard fans there have said they think it's really corny.

the movie dosen't explain that the swod Merry has is the only weapon that can pierce the Witch kings armor.... and it dosen't explain that she is one of the best swordsmen of Rohan The movie line was lame.... the book version rocks....

Originally posted by RaventheOnly the movie dosen't explain that the swod Merry has is the only weapon that can pierce the Witch kings armor.... and it dosen't explain that she is one of the best swordsmen of Rohan The movie line was lame.... the book version rocks....

That's what I'm saying, I have nothing wrong with the books, they're perfect, but the way they pulled it off in the movie was dumb.

Originally posted by cal31 That's what I'm saying, I have nothing wrong with the books, they're perfect, but the way they pulled it off in the movie was dumb.

Like the other movies, in order to get the best impression and understanding you need to watch the extended editions. But if you'd read the books you'd know what was missing and like everyone else wouldn't care. It's only confusing to the uninitiated.

Originally posted by cal31 Yes I did, but he changed a lot of stuff the movies, and in the movie we see the witch king say he's gonna kill Gandalf, but instead of being able to see that fight, we get to see dumb ass Eowyn fight and say" I am no man", thanks for the cheesiest line I've ever heard in a big movie .

So they made a slight mistake in leaving in ONE line, that indicates that Gandalf does fight the Wiki then they cut out the part where he fights the Wiki (which WILL be in the EE) but left the line in there. Thats it thats the mistake you're talking about. WOW big deal one line most people probably didn't even notice, since apparently they were too busy trying to keep up with all the characters, even though most of them are completely different (Elves, Men, Hobbits, Dwarves... yes it must be impossible to keep up ) everything else is as it should be Eowyn kills the Wiki and Merry helps JUST like they do in the book.

quote:

Originally posted by cal31 We aren't talking about the books here, we're talking the movies, and in no way shape or form will the movies be better remembered than Star Wars.Books are a completely different story. The LOTR films wouldn't even have been made if Star Wars hadn't.

I said AS AN ENTITY...

Could I borrow that crystal ball you've got? I'd like to see in to the future too.

SW wouldn't have been made without LOTR, and to attempt to seperate LOTR book from the movie when you're talking about influence is ludicrous.

Originally posted by cal31 It was fricken corny, how could the witch king, the most terrifying person other than Sauron himself, miss a weak woman with the weapons he had? It just wouldn't happen, plus on top of that you have that gay ass line and that totally ruined it. I've gone on LOTR forums and even die hard fans there have said they think it's really corny.

OK, you've definately read the wrong book or far more likely you haven't read it at all.

Eowyn killed the Wiki IN THE BOOK and its virtually the same line in the book, if anything LOTR purists would be complaining that a lot of the dialogue was cut. I AM DIEHARD FAN, I've been a LOTR fan for 21 years, in fact I remember when SW was first in the cinema.

quote:

Originally posted by RaventheOnly the movie dosen't explain that the swod Merry has is the only weapon that can pierce the Witch kings armor.... and it dosen't explain that she is one of the best swordsmen of Rohan The movie line was lame.... the book version rocks....

She could kill the Wiki because she is woman and Merry could hurt him because Merry isn't a man at all.

I think the idea that the men in LOTR would've had long hair is a fairly safe assumption, you may not have imagined them with long hair, I know I did, and I know other LOTR fans (people who've been fans for as long in some cases even longer than me)who imagined them with long hair, so clearly all this shows that I'm far from the only one.

Besides anyone who thinks having long hair makes you a pansy (or something) is a moron.

LOTR was an excellent movie to be sure, but in no way does it compare with Star Wars for sheer fandom. I dont recall there being tons of LOTR coventions? Star Wars is 27 yeasrs old and even TODAY these conventions and all the merchandising is still going strong. I also need to point out that one of the things that made LOTR so damn big was the size of Orlando Bloom's teeny boppy fan base. No one can say that didnt have an effect on that movies $$ take. Many of us read the whole LOTR stuff back in high school and then pretty much forgot about it until the movies came out. SW on the hand sticks with ya forever. Take it from an old woman.

I think the idea that the men in LOTR would've had long hair is a fairly safe assumption, you may not have imagined them with long hair, I know I did, and I know other LOTR fans (people who've been fans for as long in some cases even longer than me)who imagined them with long hair, so clearly all this shows that I'm far from the only one.

Besides anyone who thinks having long hair makes you a pansy (or something) is a moron.

Wow, you're a geek. Not knocking you, but makes me feel less nerdy. Anyway, my point wasn't that just because they have long hair they're pansy's. My point was that the characters are pansy's (my opinion of course), and they even looked like pansy's. Long hair, short hair, doesn't matter. A sissy is a sissy. If they would have had short hair, they still would have looked like pansy's to me. It's a cool movie though, not knocking the film itself. Just saying the characters are pretty wimpy, and pretty wimpy looking to boot.

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess LOTR was an excellent movie to be sure, but in no way does it compare with Star Wars for sheer fandom. I dont recall there being tons of LOTR coventions? Star Wars is 27 yeasrs old and even TODAY these conventions and all the merchandising is still going strong. I also need to point out that one of the things that made LOTR so damn big was the size of Orlando Bloom's teeny boppy fan base. No one can say that didnt have an effect on that movies $$ take. Many of us read the whole LOTR stuff back in high school and then pretty much forgot about it until the movies came out. SW on the hand sticks with ya forever. Take it from an old woman.

There are plenty of LOTR conventions, believe me.

Actually its totally the opposite way round, LOTR made Orlando famous, he was still at acting school when LOTR got hold of him.

Take it from another old woman, I've been a LOTR fan for about twenty years, so has my sister, my mum has been one for at the very least thirty years. So just because your experience is that you read LOTR once and then forgot about it, it does NOT speak for everyone, not even close... don't use your own limited experience to draw conclusions about something like LOTR... it has been popular for fifty years, LOTR stays with most people for life... your point is well... pointless because its based on nothing at all, how could that possibly be true when its been popular for so long.

On the other hand I watched SW when it first came out and I really couldn't give a stuff about it, in fact now I find it boring, so this is clearly an entirely personal thing, so you can't base any assumptions on it, because it doesn't apply to everyone, not even close.

quote:

Originally posted by MF D00m Wow, you're a geek. Not knocking you, but makes me feel less nerdy. Anyway, my point wasn't that just because they have long hair they're pansy's. My point was that the characters are pansy's (my opinion of course), and they even looked like pansy's. Long hair, short hair, doesn't matter. A sissy is a sissy. If they would have had short hair, they still would have looked like pansy's to me. It's a cool movie though, not knocking the film itself. Just saying the characters are pretty wimpy, and pretty wimpy looking to boot.

I don't mind being a geek, at all.

You are entitled to your opinion, I happen to disagree, but thats beside the point.

In terms of success, Lord of the Rings wins by virtue of all the awards, box office gross, and critcal praise it got. In terms of impact, they tie. Both have revolutionized the way Sci-Fi/Fantasy movies are made, and they both introduced breakthrough SFX techniques. So overall, LotR wins

Originally posted by BackFire "I don't like sand, it's course and it gets everywhere, unlike you."

As cheesy as those lines are, CA, I blieve this one tops them.

please let's not forget "I will be the most powerful Jedi ever"
Everytime i hear makes me want to strangle him . But i love Star (not hardcore like some people) but still...LOTR is better IMO. the story is much more thoughout, the overall look is extremely well done and consistant (unlike SW due to difference in the era's in which the movies were made).

SW is great, but i just cant seem to get lost in its universe like i do in LOTR's middle-earth. *sniff *sniff*....did i smell chesse off that last line

Originally posted by Darth Revan Star Wars kicks LOTR's ass. And SW was inspired by Flash Gordon, I thought....

it was to a degree.. also lotr came from someone elses writing.. so jackson didnt have to create a story, lucas created his mostly form the ground up.. it was also a very new idea for a movie and the execs were not happy about it before it came out.. then everyone loved it... SW wins by far

same to you el toro.. with the story being more thougth out.. he copied a book he didnt have to think about the story just how hed shoot it... plus LOTR is more like 1 movie anyway than it is a trillogy where as each SW can stand alone

Originally posted by forumcrew it was to a degree.. also lotr came from someone elses writing.. so jackson didnt have to create a story, lucas created his mostly form the ground up.. it was also a very new idea for a movie and the execs were not happy about it before it came out.. then everyone loved it... SW wins by far

same to you el toro.. with the story being more thougth out.. he copied a book he didnt have to think about the story just how hed shoot it... plus LOTR is more like 1 movie anyway than it is a trillogy where as each SW can stand alone

I wouldn't go that far although the story was already there, a book like the LOTR doesn't just automatically translate to screen, it takes a lot of talent. Why do you think no-one made the entire thing before PJ? People believed it was impossible to film (not just because of the necessity for CGI)... in fact I'd say your argument works better the other way round.

George Lucas started with nothing so he could do what ever he wanted.

On the other hand PJ had too stick close enough to the original to please as many book fans as possible (something he did exceedingly well), but also make a book written 50 years ago by a professor of old english with made up languages (sp?) in it, that is over 1000 pages long, into a film, audiences who'd never even heard of LOTR could enjoy.

quote:

Originally posted by MF D00m So are you saying they do look tough? Geez, I'd hate to see what you think a sissy is.

Who's more tough:

(please log in to view the image)

or

(please log in to view the image)

?

I'd have to go with Simmons on this one.

You could at least have been fair and picked the toughest character, poor Frodo he's only a little hobbit.